Interference No. 102,712
I. Whether evidence adduced by junior party Mehrotra is
sufficient to establish a date of invention prior to senior
party Augustine’s effective filing date of May 5, 1986.
II. If Mehrotra is found to have established a date of
invention prior to Augustine’s effective filing date, whether
Augustine has adduced sufficient evidence to establish an even
earlier date of invention.
III. Suzuki motion to designate all of its involved
claims as not corresponding to the count (Motion 3: denied).
IV. Suzuki motion for judgment that all the involved
Augustine claims are unpatentable for failure to satisfy the
“best mode” requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph
(Motion 5: deferred to final hearing).
V. Augustine motion to suppress evidence (Paper No. 191).
Each of the parties has presented a testimonial record,
submitted exhibits, filed briefs and appeared, through
counsel, at final hearing.3
indicated in parentheses.
3The record, exhibits, brief and reply brief of Mehrotra
will hereinafter be respectively referred to by the
abbreviations “MR”, “MX”, “MB” and “MRB” followed by an
appropriate page or exhibit number. Similar abbreviations
will be used when referring to the record, exhibits and briefs
of Suzuki (SR, SX, SB, SRB) and Augustine (AR, AX, AB, ARB).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007